BUDDHISM IN THAILAND IS IN NEED OF RADICAL CHANGE

Thai nationalists tap a source of empty pride
By METTANANDO BHIKKHU, Bangkok Post, Feb 7, 2007
The writer argues that Buddhism in Thailand is in need of radical change, but definitely not through the grandiose status of a National Religion
Bangkok, Thailand -- In every change there is always a chance. This saying is true not only in business, but also for Buddhist nationalists in Thailand who are trying to make Buddhism a national religion under a new constitution that is being drafted.
<<>
At present it seems the winds of change are blowing in their favour, but they have not considered the full implications of appointing Buddhism as the National Religion, which would give empty pride to the majority of Thais who, sadly, have little awareness of what is going on in their own religion.
The nomination of a National Religion is not only undemocratic; it would be oppressive to other equally nationalist Thais who are not Buddhists and hurt the peace process in the South. And it would mean nothing, in practice, for Buddhist monks under the oppressive Ecclesiastical Act of BE 2505 (1962) which was issued during the military dictatorship of Field Marshal Sarit Thanarat, based on the assumption of Buddhism as Thailand's national religion.
According to the Lord Buddha, the Sangha or the Buddhist Community is the family of monks and nuns who respect each other according to their seniority of ordination. It serves not only as an institution for spiritual development with healthcare and freedom of education; it also has system of regulations independent of the state.
The Buddhist community has survived for over 2,000 years in many countries without support from government.
There is a huge defect in the Ecclesiastical Act, which was written to impose a feudalistic structure of administration on top of the Sangha, wherein the once universal brotherhood among monks has been eroded and their rights as citizens of Thailand sacrificed to the security of the feudal hierarchy of their superiors.
Under this Act, all Thai monks are ruled under a feudal system, another state within the kingdom wherein abbots serve as state officers and they have authority to rule over their temples. A rotation of positions is not included in this system.
One outcome of this law is seen in the Thai language: the original meaning of Sangha as a ''community'' has been lost. Now the word ''sangha'' in Thai means an ''individual monk''.
Unbelievably, in Thailand where monks are highly respected, under this feudalistic law monks who apply for citizen ID cards at any local office of the government are threatened with being defrocked.
Also, monks have no right to apply for passports without consent from each member of their ecclesiastical hierarchy, which normally takes months to complete before the application form can be forwarded to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Monks who are liberal, reformist or those who disagree with any policy of the Ecclesiastical Council risk getting no consent for their passports, and thus no freedom of movement.
They are also barred from communicating through any form of state-run public media.
Taking comfort in the feudal culture of the Thai clergy, the Ecclesiastical Council of Thailand never endorses any bills, document or policies of the United Nations which endorses rights or equality among people.
The clergy's oppressive system is not its only problem. The monks' education system also needs much improvement. Currently, there is no teaching of Thai culture, society, history or geography in the ecclesiastical syllabus. All these subjects have been classified by the monastic council as merely secular.
While Pali literature is promoted by the Ecclesiastical Council, the only text is an archaic one on Pali grammar composed by a princely monk, formatted like the Victorian English grammar book, making it extremely difficult for students to comprehend. This text also prevents them from understanding Pali grammar as taught in other Buddhist countries, such as Sri Lanka and Burma. Instead of studying the Tripitaka, the canonical literature of Buddhism, the Ecclesiastical Council views that the Tripitaka is too holy for anyone to study or interpret. With this reason, they include only commentaries, mostly written by the monks of Mahavihara temple in Sri Lanka in the 5th-10th centuries AD as their set texts, second-hand literature written 1,000 years after the Buddha.
Up till now there has been no attempt by any government of Thailand nor the Ecclesiastical Council to change the syllabus because it is bound to the old, feudal royal ties. Unlike the Tripitaka, the commentaries have no room for radical analysis or criticism. They focus mainly on defending the Buddhist faith and glorifying Lord Buddha by miracles and supernaturalism. These stories do not encourage monks to be aware of their social responsibility, blaming all vicissitudes of life on past karma or conduct.
The impact of such commentarial literature is present and clear in every Theravada country: status quos are endorsed; women are seen as inferior creatures; all inequalities in society are seen as displays of the Law of Karma and all victims deserve their fate and humility; all this makes social development planning almost impossible.
It is not surprising that instead of being a religion of peace and wisdom, Buddhism in Thailand fosters supernaturalism. Many high-ranking monks in Bangkok are astrologers, masters of the occult arts or entrepreneurs in the amulet industry, making Thailand one of the world's largest amulet producers. The amulet market, also controlled by the Ecclesiastical Council in Thailand, is as lucrative as that of the underground lottery: billions of baht circulate in this business daily, and it is all tax-free.
Buddhism in Thailand is in need of radical change - but not through the grandiose status of a National Religion. Rather, we need a separation of Church and State, so that Buddhism can be freed from governmental control and the feudal lords of the Ecclesiastical Council. It will be good not only for Buddhists, but for the development of democracy in Thailand.
Mettanando Bhikkhu is a Thai Buddhist monk and a former physician. He is special adviser on Buddhist affairs to the secretary-general of the World Conference of Religions for Peace.

BUDDHIST DOCTRINE FOR ALL

by Ven Dr Beligalle Dhammajoti, Lanka Daily News, May 28, 2010

Colombo, Sri Lanka -- Some scholars with a little knowledge of Buddhism are of the opinion that there is no socio-economic and political philosophy of Buddhism.

A well-known scholar, Max Weber, who is considered as’ father of sociology of religion’ explaining the socio-political aspect of Buddhism says: “Buddhism had no sort of tie with any sort of social movement, nor did it run in parallel with such and it has established no social and political goal.” He further says that Buddhism is a social and anti-political and it can be considered to be an ‘other-worldly religion.’

This is a misleading and distorted concept of Buddhist doctrine. It is very clear that Max Weber never analyzed and understood Buddhist teachings deeply. Early Buddhism is in no way another-worldly religion. It includes a well-defined socio-economic and political philosophy and also a philosophy of history. Professors D D Kosambi and Rhys Davids explicitly recognize that there is a socio-economic and political philosophy of Buddhism and their idea give one lie to the above-mentioned notion of Max Weber.

Another misconceived idea of Buddhism states that Buddhism is such a sublime system that ordinary people cannot practice it. One has to retire to a monastery if one desires to be a true Buddhist.

This is a partial and distorted view. The doctrine of the Buddha is meant not only for mendicant monks but also for ordinary men and women living in their homes with their family members. The Noble Eightfold Path, meditation on loving-kindness and ten perfection are meant for all. They can be practised in their daily life.

It is extremely incorrect to say that Buddhism is social. Addressing the first 60 Arhaths, the Buddha says: “O monks walk on tour, for the good of the many, for the happiness of the many, for the welfare of the many, good and happiness of human beings and celestial beings.” This shows that the Buddha has laid much emphasis on the members of society and their welfare. Therefore the old Buddhist monasteries had become the spiritual centres and the centres of learning and culture. The five precepts are meant for the whole human society. Any person can observe them and lead a spiritual life and that would be of great benefit for him and to this competitive society.

The Sigalovada Sutta explicitly explains the family and social relationships. It gives a set of instructions and teachings that pertain to man’s socio-economic and spiritual progress. Modern man can lead a very happy and prosperous life if he understands the significance of these social relations explained in the Sigalovada Sutta.

Some scholars are of the opinion that Buddhist philosophy is interested only in higher morality and it ignores the social and economic welfare. This is also another misconception of Buddhist socio-economic and political philosophy. The Kutadanta Sutta explains the way and approach of development of a country with proper planning and also it shows the nature of socio-economic progress. We should not forget that the Buddha expounded these words in the 6th Century BC and even today that they are of great value.

The Cakkavattisihanada Sutta explains poverty, revolution, poverty-related crimes and the reasons for the chaotic situation of a country and also the reasonable grounds for arising those social ills. Today our competitive global society experiences these socio-economic and political ills and tribulations that are explained in the Cakkavattisihanada Sutta.

In the Agganna Sutta we find a theory of the origin of social classes. There the Buddha explains the arising and evolution, the origin of State, the evolution of human race and social grades, the changing nature of moral values and the relationship between moral degeneration and the deterioration of environmental elements. The Sutta explains how beings were becoming less hard-working, less honest, less ethical and how they lost their physical and mental qualities with the passage of time.

Fundamental unreasonable concepts related to social organisations were radically transformed by the Buddha. The Buddha explained the nature of those concepts and their connection with the ditthis or dogmatic views of certain religious traditions.

The socio-economic and cultural transformations by the Buddha can be seen explicitly even in the present time in our Buddhist societies. Making a comment on the social upheaval of Buddhism, Narendranath Bhatthacharya says:

“The rise of Buddhism was certainly to serve some social purpose. It had some distinct social and functional role. But very few attempts have been made to understand all these.”

It is a well-known fact that Buddhism is capable of making a drastic transformation of the present day competitive and war-like Society. For such a transformation, it needs a proper knowledge and correct understanding of the Buddha’s teachings.

The first significant work in the Buddhist social field was Die Religion des Buddha (1957) written by C F Koppen. In his book Koppen explains.

“.....the Buddha was viewed as the emancipator of the oppressed and a great political innovator.”

Here it is very interesting to note that Koppen was a close friend of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.

Karl Marx ruthlessly criticized religion and the widely accepted concept of omnipotent God. Buddhism is completely free from that criticism, for it has no concepts of God. Trevor Ling in his great work on Buddha, Marx and God explains that Buddhism is free from his critique. French scholar La Loubere says that Buddhism is totally different from other religions as it does not possesses a doctrine of God and it teaches rebirth (re-becoming or Punabbhava) without accepting the concept of a soul. Addressing the Berlin Science Academy in 1856, Albrecht Weber explained that Buddhist teachings were so helpful for social reformation and it had accepted the equality of all human beings.